Page 47 of 54 FirstFirst ... 374546474849 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 470 of 540

Thread: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

  1. #461
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Charging someone with a crime because a photograph offended people violates the first amendment.
    The picture isn't the violation. The picture is the evidence of a violation in progress. Would you claim an arrest based upon a video of a rape to be a violation of the first amendment?
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  2. #462
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Warning: Extremely offensive image in link

    Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue | The Smoking Gun



    I find it disgusting that this is a misdemeanor. It ought to be punished by imprisonment.
    I find the actions offensive, but if he didn't damage the statue, I don't see how it's a crime.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  3. #463
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    12-16-16 @ 06:44 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    4

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    I would love it if the photograph turned out to have been shopped. Would it still count as an actual 'desecration'?

  4. #464
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,085

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I would love it if the photograph turned out to have been shopped. Would it still count as an actual 'desecration'?
    I wonder if it would be desecration if he owned the statue?

  5. #465
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by blarg View Post
    I wonder if it would be desecration if he owned the statue?
    By the technical definition of the word, yes. However, by law, if it is his property or if he had permission there is nothing legal that could have been done. Sort of along the same lines as there has always been SSM in reality, but not legally.
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  6. #466
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    I find the actions offensive, but if he didn't damage the statue, I don't see how it's a crime.
    It violated a criminal law.

  7. #467
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    It violated a criminal law.
    And that criminal law is unconstitutional. People can make laws all they want, it doesn't mean they are without challenge or they are constitutional. A town can make a law that says eating hamburgers on Thursday is illegal. Doesn't mean it is constitutional, just ask Bloomburg on that one.

  8. #468
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    And that criminal law is unconstitutional. People can make laws all they want, it doesn't mean they are without challenge or they are constitutional. A town can make a law that says eating hamburgers on Thursday is illegal. Doesn't mean it is constitutional, just ask Bloomburg on that one.
    However until that law is challenged in a court, then the arrest and charge still has to be made by those who enforce and try violations of the law. So the point of the law being unconstitutional is moot until it is challenged. Additionally it is not necessarily unconstitutional. What is your basis for saying so?
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  9. #469
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    However until that law is challenged in a court, then the arrest and charge still has to be made by those who enforce and try violations of the law. So the point of the law being unconstitutional is moot until it is challenged. Additionally it is not necessarily unconstitutional. What is your basis for saying so?
    Religious freedom. You are forcing the boy to conform to a strictly religious law, blasphemy which would be going against freedom of religion and is unconstitutional. It would be similiar to creating a law saying you cannot burn a bible.

  10. #470
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: Boy Charged For Desecration Of Jesus Statue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Religious freedom. You are forcing the boy to conform to a strictly religious law, blasphemy which would be going against freedom of religion and is unconstitutional. It would be similiar to creating a law saying you cannot burn a bible.
    Sorry, but no go. Desecration applies to both religious and non religious objects, so it is not an issue of religious freedom. Nor is this an issues of freedom of speech. As noted had the boy permission, or owned the statue, then a charge could be said to apply unconstitutionally by either of those reasons. But the law in and of itself really has no basis to be called unconstitutional.
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

Page 47 of 54 FirstFirst ... 374546474849 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •